Effectiveness of non-bedside teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: a quasi-experimental study.


Journal

BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
31 Jan 2022
Historique:
received: 14 09 2021
accepted: 27 01 2022
entrez: 1 2 2022
pubmed: 2 2 2022
medline: 3 2 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The COVID-19 pandemic poses a huge challenge for clinical teaching due to contact restrictions and social distancing. Medical teachers have to balance potential risks and benefits of bedside teaching, especially in course formats intended to foster practical clinical skills. In this context, we aimed to address the question, whether presence-based teaching formats without patient involvement are suitable to teach practical skills. In this quasi-experimental study, presence-based teaching formats with and without patient contact were retrospectively compared regarding their effects on medical students' theoretical knowledge and practical skills, i.e. the performance and clinical interpretation of the neurological exam. To this end, evaluations from 102 students and their lecturers participating in a neurological bedside teaching course at a German university hospital between October 2020 and April 2021 were obtained. Students were initially randomly assigned to course dates. However, 53 students assigned to courses in November and December 2020, were not able to go bedside due to contact restrictions. These students formed the interventional group and the remaining 49 students the control group. The primary outcome measures were students' overall grading of the course (school grades, 1-6) as well as ratings of knowledge and skills provided by the students themselves and their lecturers on a numerical rating scale (0-10). Comparison between groups was performed using frequentist and Bayesian t-statistics. The teaching format without patient contact received a significantly poorer overall grade by the students (p = 0.018). However, improvements in the students' self-ratings of knowledge and skills did not differ between the two formats (all p > 0.05, BF Teaching formats without patient contact are less well-received by the students. However, they are able to teach practical skills regarding the performance and clinical interpretation of examination techniques. Still, the evaluations obtained might not adequately capture the importance of bedside teaching in preparing future physicians for their practice. Perspectively, hybrid teaching approaches including flipped-classroom concepts hold considerable potential to enhance effectiveness of bedside teaching in the present pandemic situation and in the future.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The COVID-19 pandemic poses a huge challenge for clinical teaching due to contact restrictions and social distancing. Medical teachers have to balance potential risks and benefits of bedside teaching, especially in course formats intended to foster practical clinical skills. In this context, we aimed to address the question, whether presence-based teaching formats without patient involvement are suitable to teach practical skills.
METHODS METHODS
In this quasi-experimental study, presence-based teaching formats with and without patient contact were retrospectively compared regarding their effects on medical students' theoretical knowledge and practical skills, i.e. the performance and clinical interpretation of the neurological exam. To this end, evaluations from 102 students and their lecturers participating in a neurological bedside teaching course at a German university hospital between October 2020 and April 2021 were obtained. Students were initially randomly assigned to course dates. However, 53 students assigned to courses in November and December 2020, were not able to go bedside due to contact restrictions. These students formed the interventional group and the remaining 49 students the control group. The primary outcome measures were students' overall grading of the course (school grades, 1-6) as well as ratings of knowledge and skills provided by the students themselves and their lecturers on a numerical rating scale (0-10). Comparison between groups was performed using frequentist and Bayesian t-statistics.
RESULTS RESULTS
The teaching format without patient contact received a significantly poorer overall grade by the students (p = 0.018). However, improvements in the students' self-ratings of knowledge and skills did not differ between the two formats (all p > 0.05, BF
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Teaching formats without patient contact are less well-received by the students. However, they are able to teach practical skills regarding the performance and clinical interpretation of examination techniques. Still, the evaluations obtained might not adequately capture the importance of bedside teaching in preparing future physicians for their practice. Perspectively, hybrid teaching approaches including flipped-classroom concepts hold considerable potential to enhance effectiveness of bedside teaching in the present pandemic situation and in the future.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35101016
doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03141-z
pii: 10.1186/s12909-022-03141-z
pmc: PMC8801559
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

73

Informations de copyright

© 2022. The Author(s).

Références

Med Teach. 2020 Nov;42(11):1310-1312
pubmed: 32726155
BMC Med Educ. 2017 Nov 25;17(1):230
pubmed: 29178886
BMC Med Educ. 2020 Mar 14;20(1):73
pubmed: 32171297
GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Jan 28;38(1):Doc14
pubmed: 33659619
JMIR Med Educ. 2020 Nov 18;6(2):e20963
pubmed: 33106227
Teach Learn Med. 2021 Jun-Jul;33(3):334-342
pubmed: 33706632
Med Educ Online. 2021 Dec;26(1):1899642
pubmed: 33685381
Med Teach. 2020 Nov;42(11):1202-1215
pubmed: 32847456
GMS J Med Educ. 2020 Dec 03;37(7):Doc99
pubmed: 33364378
Nat Neurosci. 2020 Jul;23(7):788-799
pubmed: 32601411
GMS J Med Educ. 2016 Aug 15;33(4):Doc59
pubmed: 27579359
Med Educ Online. 2019 Dec;24(1):1608142
pubmed: 31032719
Med Educ Online. 2016 Sep 27;21:32476
pubmed: 27680578
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Apr 20;18(8):
pubmed: 33924026
GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Jan 28;38(1):Doc9
pubmed: 33659614
Clin Teach. 2021 Aug;18(4):367-369
pubmed: 33319476
GMS J Med Educ. 2020 Dec 03;37(7):Doc69
pubmed: 33364348
Med Educ Online. 2020 Dec;25(1):1764740
pubmed: 32400298
Clin Teach. 2021 Aug;18(4):398-403
pubmed: 33763984
BMC Med Educ. 2013 Apr 17;13:55
pubmed: 23594455
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91
pubmed: 17695343

Auteurs

Henrik Heitmann (H)

Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany. henrik.heitmann@tum.de.

Philipp Wagner (P)

Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.

Elisabeth Fischer (E)

Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.

Martin Gartmeier (M)

TUM Medical Education Center, School of Medicine, TUM, Munich, Germany.

Friederike Schmidt-Graf (F)

Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH